lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Benchmarks of kernel tracing options 2 (ftrace, lttng and perf)
Quoting Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>:

> On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 16:31 -0500, Douglas Santos wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > This is a response to a benchmark, submitted a few weeks ago, comparing
> kernel
> > tracing options.
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/28/422
> >
> > We followed the methodology described in the link bellow,
> > but using the shellscripts posted there to reproduce autotest scripts.
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/28/261
> >
> > We disabled the extra syscall tracing on lttng, for a fair comparison.
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/28/290
> >
> > Average results with tracing "on":
> >
> > lttng: 220 ns
> > ftrace: 260 ns
>
> Heh, so ftrace got worse with the new kernel?

The previous bench was doing tracing "on" minus "off"
average results. They also used autotest scripts, not sure if
it does exactly the same thing.

I'll check if we missed something.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-17 23:59    [W:0.052 / U:1.024 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site